CALVINISM: The height of Spiritual depravity

[Taken]

Ism means belief.

Rather I would say the suffix “ism” is more so a manner “OF” practice…”OF” a belief.

 

[Taken]

You can't quote Calvin to refute Calvinism because, ironically... Calvinism wasn't started by Calvin.

Calvinism came into being in opposition to the teachings of Arminius and his followers, the Arminians. This happened two generations after Calvin died in 1564.

Thanks. I don’t know the man, nor about him. I had a suspicion, what was accredited to him, even like in modern times, was “tweaked” among men and preached, as accountable to Calvin.

 

[Logikos]

Thanks. There is one word I disagree with…
“that they are not only bound by his fetters but are even forced to do him service”

God IS the source of ALL LIFE.
God DOES give and take LIFE.
God DOES know Before men know, what a man WILL CHOOSE.
God HAS prepared a consequence, a destiny for men WITH Him, and men WITHOUT Him.

God ALL knowing and God ALL prepared…
Does not negate the Freewill Choosing of men.

From these quotes, I do not see a problem…
Perhaps the “Problem” is the meaning of “PREDESTINATION” being construed by some men to mean….MEN are pre-designed to BE EVIL, thus nullifying a Choice….
(I don”t believe that.)

God Created “EVIL”, which is a “THING”, a “CONCEPT” of a behavior, NOT a Person.

God also Established, “PRECEPTS”…
PRE-Knowledge, of Gods teaching of BEHAVIORS God Himself finds acceptable AND most beneficial for BEHAVIORS between and among men., which are found in the OT, amongst the Laws, and taught to practice in the OT and NT.

Neh 9:
[14] And madest known unto them thy holy sabbath, and commandedst them precepts, statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant:

Glory to God,
Taken

This is not an issue of semantics, Taken. Use whatever words you want to convey the concepts that you like. It's the concepts that are the problem, not the words used to convey them.

Let me illustrate what I mean by asking you a question.

Calvin believed that ALL the actions of ALL men (humans) were predestine by God. Not only that but Calvin taught that His predestination is not because of His foreknowledge but rather the other way around. (See the 8th quotation provided in my previous post.)

Do you believe that anyone has any ability to do otherwise?

If you answer, "no" then whether you want to use the term "forced" or not, is beside the point and doesn't change the meaning of Calvin's statement.

In short, Calvinism teaches that things happen, whether for good or bad, by God's own arbitrary decision and decree and for no other reason, and that whether a particular person is saved or condemned is an arbitrary decision made by God. And by "arbitrary" I mean that the decision was made for reasons completely detached from the person themselves or anything that anyone has or hasn't done. Changing a single word in one sentence isn't even going to mitigate that, never mind remedy or cure it.

 

[Taken]

This is not an issue of semantics, Taken. Use whatever words you want to convey the concepts that you like. It's the concepts that are the problem, not the words used to convey them.

Let me illustrate what I mean by asking you a question.

Calvin believed that ALL the actions of ALL men (humans) were predestine by God. Not only that but Calvin taught that His predestination is not because of His foreknowledge but rather the other way around. (See the 8th quotation provided in my previous post.)

Do you believe that anyone has any ability to do otherwise?

If you answer, "no" then whether you want to use the term "forced" or not, is beside the point and doesn't change the meaning of Calvin's statement.

In short, Calvinism teaches that things happen, whether for good or bad, by God's own arbitrary decision and decree and for no other reason, and that whether a particular person is saved or condemned is an arbitrary decision made by God. And by "arbitrary" I mean that the decision was made for reasons completely detached from the person themselves or anything that anyone has or hasn't done. Changing a single word in one sentence isn't even going to mitigate that, never mind remedy or cure it.

Not ignoring you… but rather this conversation takes more time, as previously stated, I am not familiar with Calvin, or whatever people today thinks that means.
I am multi-tasking, have fires (literally) burning and tending….which responding to things I am more familiar with requires less time.
Will try to address this conversation with you later this evening.

God Bless you,
Taken

 

[Phil .]

Thank you, Capt. Obvious!

Anytime.

Since Calvinism is belief(s), who cares, right?

 

[Phil .]

Rather I would say the suffix “ism” is more so a manner “OF” practice…”OF” a belief.

Yes, a manner or practice of delusion.

 

[Rella ~ I am a woman]

Thanks. I don’t know the man, nor about him. I had a suspicion, what was accredited to him, even like in modern times, was “tweaked” among men and preached, as accountable to Calvin.

Here is a little commentary on Calvin and his beliefs.

Calvin: Predestination

Calvin on predestination: To his glory, God determined before all creation those who would obtain eternal life, and those who would receive eternal death.

www.theologian-theology.com

John Calvin on Predestination​

Calvin on Predestination​

John Calvin’s doctrine of predestination has often been rejected as unjust. In this series of two articles I will explain why, according to John Calvin, this charge is misplaced. In this article, I will summarize Calvin’s doctrine of predestination. My discussion of Calvin’s view will draw on excerpts from Book III, chapters 21-23, of his Institutes of the Christian Religion (1559) in Hans J. Hillerbrand’s collection The Protestant Reformation (ordinary page references are to this work), and sections 3.24.4 and 3.24.5 of Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion translated by Henry Beveridge (decimal references are to this work, pictured to the right).

Predestination According to Calvin​

According to John Calvin, predestination is God’s unchangeable decree from before the creation of the world that he would freely save some people (the elect), foreordaining them to eternal life, while the others (the reprobate) would be “barred from access to” salvation and sentenced to “eternal death (180, 184).” Calvin was careful to distinguish the predestination of individuals from the corporate election of nations such as Israel (185). He argued that an explanation of predestination is only complete when it includes the election of individuals (187).
Calvin described the basis of predestination in several ways. In general he affirmed that there is no basis for election outside of God. Referring to Eph. 1.9, Calvin noted that God purposed election “in Himself,” basing his decree of predestination on “nothing outside Himself (192).” Calvin attributed the salvation of the elect to God’s free decision to favor them (188). He variously described this as God’s “mere generosity (180, 187),” his “freely given mercy (189, 195, 211),” and the “good pleasure of His will (191; cf. Eph. 1.5).” Moreover, Calvin based the damnation of the reprobate solely in God’s decision (189, 200).
Since God’s reasons for predestination are wholly internal to his being (190), they are opaque to humanity. Ultimately, then, the basis of God’s predestination is mysterious and “utterly incomprehensible” to people (209). This mystery points to one of God’s purposes in predestination, to inspire wonder and reverence in believers (181). The things hidden in God are not to be understood by people, but rather revered in their “wonderful depth (179).” Indeed, for John Calvin the overarching purpose of predestination is for God to be glorified, both in the praise of the elect for his grace (192), and in the terrible yet glorious judgment of the reprobate (199).
Despite the mysterious basis of predestination, it is possible for the elect to be certain of their status as children of God (187). The first and seemingly most important indicator of election is what Calvin referred to as “the calling of God (3.24.4, 189).” His use of this term seems to refer to a subjective inward certainty that God has chosen a person for salvation. Elsewhere, Calvin suggested that having “knowledge of [God’s] name” and reflecting the process of sanctification are both indicators of election (189). Moreover, Calvin claimed that “communion with Christ” is sufficient proof of election (3.24.5): since we are elected in Jesus Christ (Eph. 1.4), we cannot seek the certainty of election “apart from the Son (3.24.5).” Calvin also seemed to obscurely suggest that the daily blessings received from the hand of God might rightly be perceived as an indication of election, “that secret adoption (3.24.4).” Together, these signs—the foremost being “the calling of God,”—yield certainty of salvation and tranquil peace with God (3.24.4).

John Calvin also defined his doctrine of predestination in opposition to differing views held by his contemporaries. First, Calvin took up the view that God predestines people according to his foreknowledge of their works. While Calvin affirmed the foreknowledge of God (184), he denied that God “adopts as sons those whom He foreknows will not be unworthy of His grace,” and damns those he knows will be inclined to “evil intention and ungodliness (190).” From Ephesians 1.4 he argued that one purpose of God’s election was to make his children holy. Since holiness is to be produced by election, it made no sense to Calvin to assert the reverse (191-2). Moreover, the whole point of teaching that election took place before creation (Eph. 1.4) is to demonstrate that election had nothing to do with meritorious works (191). Indeed, for Calvin another important purpose of predestination was to communicate that salvation is not based on individual merit but solely on God’s grace (191).
Second, Calvin took up the view that God elects some but condemns none (200). Calvin saw this view as “highly absurd” since it seemed to imply that the salvation received by the elect could also be attained by the non-elect as a result of “chance” or “their own effort (200).” Rejecting this inconsistent implication, Calvin asserted that the reprobate are those God intentionally neglects to choose (200). From Rom. 9.14ff, Calvin argued that the hardening of non-elect hearts is as much attributable to God as is mercy. Moreover, he noted that Paul did not shy away from this dreadful conclusion, but rather questioned the right of the clay to protest the Potter’s work (Rom. 9.20), and linked condemnation of the reprobate to God’s glory (Rom. 9.22-23). For John Calvin, election could not but stand “over against reprobation (200).”
In the next article in this series I will describe why and how Calvin chose to teach predestination, and I will articulate Calvin’s defense of predestination as just.

Also, Calvin also referred to himself as a prophet.

 

[Logikos]

Anytime.

Since Calvinism is belief(s), who cares, right?

If you don't start making sense then I'll simply put you on ignore.

Romans 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.”

 

[Logikos]

Here is a little commentary on Calvin and his beliefs.

Calvin: Predestination

Calvin on predestination: To his glory, God determined before all creation those who would obtain eternal life, and those who would receive eternal death.

www.theologian-theology.com

John Calvin on Predestination​

Calvin on Predestination​

John Calvin’s doctrine of predestination has often been rejected as unjust. In this series of two articles I will explain why, according to John Calvin, this charge is misplaced. In this article, I will summarize Calvin’s doctrine of predestination. My discussion of Calvin’s view will draw on excerpts from Book III, chapters 21-23, of his Institutes of the Christian Religion (1559) in Hans J. Hillerbrand’s collection The Protestant Reformation (ordinary page references are to this work), and sections 3.24.4 and 3.24.5 of Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion translated by Henry Beveridge (decimal references are to this work, pictured to the right).

Predestination According to Calvin​

According to John Calvin, predestination is God’s unchangeable decree from before the creation of the world that he would freely save some people (the elect), foreordaining them to eternal life, while the others (the reprobate) would be “barred from access to” salvation and sentenced to “eternal death (180, 184).” Calvin was careful to distinguish the predestination of individuals from the corporate election of nations such as Israel (185). He argued that an explanation of predestination is only complete when it includes the election of individuals (187).
Calvin described the basis of predestination in several ways. In general he affirmed that there is no basis for election outside of God. Referring to Eph. 1.9, Calvin noted that God purposed election “in Himself,” basing his decree of predestination on “nothing outside Himself (192).” Calvin attributed the salvation of the elect to God’s free decision to favor them (188). He variously described this as God’s “mere generosity (180, 187),” his “freely given mercy (189, 195, 211),” and the “good pleasure of His will (191; cf. Eph. 1.5).” Moreover, Calvin based the damnation of the reprobate solely in God’s decision (189, 200).
Since God’s reasons for predestination are wholly internal to his being (190), they are opaque to humanity. Ultimately, then, the basis of God’s predestination is mysterious and “utterly incomprehensible” to people (209). This mystery points to one of God’s purposes in predestination, to inspire wonder and reverence in believers (181). The things hidden in God are not to be understood by people, but rather revered in their “wonderful depth (179).” Indeed, for John Calvin the overarching purpose of predestination is for God to be glorified, both in the praise of the elect for his grace (192), and in the terrible yet glorious judgment of the reprobate (199).
Despite the mysterious basis of predestination, it is possible for the elect to be certain of their status as children of God (187). The first and seemingly most important indicator of election is what Calvin referred to as “the calling of God (3.24.4, 189).” His use of this term seems to refer to a subjective inward certainty that God has chosen a person for salvation. Elsewhere, Calvin suggested that having “knowledge of [God’s] name” and reflecting the process of sanctification are both indicators of election (189). Moreover, Calvin claimed that “communion with Christ” is sufficient proof of election (3.24.5): since we are elected in Jesus Christ (Eph. 1.4), we cannot seek the certainty of election “apart from the Son (3.24.5).” Calvin also seemed to obscurely suggest that the daily blessings received from the hand of God might rightly be perceived as an indication of election, “that secret adoption (3.24.4).” Together, these signs—the foremost being “the calling of God,”—yield certainty of salvation and tranquil peace with God (3.24.4).

John Calvin also defined his doctrine of predestination in opposition to differing views held by his contemporaries. First, Calvin took up the view that God predestines people according to his foreknowledge of their works. While Calvin affirmed the foreknowledge of God (184), he denied that God “adopts as sons those whom He foreknows will not be unworthy of His grace,” and damns those he knows will be inclined to “evil intention and ungodliness (190).” From Ephesians 1.4 he argued that one purpose of God’s election was to make his children holy. Since holiness is to be produced by election, it made no sense to Calvin to assert the reverse (191-2). Moreover, the whole point of teaching that election took place before creation (Eph. 1.4) is to demonstrate that election had nothing to do with meritorious works (191). Indeed, for Calvin another important purpose of predestination was to communicate that salvation is not based on individual merit but solely on God’s grace (191).
Second, Calvin took up the view that God elects some but condemns none (200). Calvin saw this view as “highly absurd” since it seemed to imply that the salvation received by the elect could also be attained by the non-elect as a result of “chance” or “their own effort (200).” Rejecting this inconsistent implication, Calvin asserted that the reprobate are those God intentionally neglects to choose (200). From Rom. 9.14ff, Calvin argued that the hardening of non-elect hearts is as much attributable to God as is mercy. Moreover, he noted that Paul did not shy away from this dreadful conclusion, but rather questioned the right of the clay to protest the Potter’s work (Rom. 9.20), and linked condemnation of the reprobate to God’s glory (Rom. 9.22-23). For John Calvin, election could not but stand “over against reprobation (200).”
In the next article in this series I will describe why and how Calvin chose to teach predestination, and I will articulate Calvin’s defense of predestination as just.

Also, Calvin also referred to himself as a prophet.

In the 2nd article that you link to in the last sentence, Calvin's defense is "God did it, therefore it's just.", which renders the concept of justice meaningless when applied to God. In effect, Calvin's defense is that God is amoral.

Not exactly what I'd call convincing.

 

[Rella ~ I am a woman]

In the 2nd article that you link to in the last sentence, Calvin's defense is "God did it, therefore it's just.", which renders the concept of justice meaningless when applied to God. In effect, Calvin's defense is that God is amoral.

Not exactly what I'd call convincing.

You are right....

But it is surprising that Calvin is very present within the Westminster Confession of Faith.

From Britannica: Westminster Confession | Presbyterianism, Calvinism, Reformed Theology

Westminster Confession, confession of faith of English-speaking Presbyterians. It was produced by the Westminster Assembly, which was called together by the Long Parliament in 1643, during the English Civil War, and met regularly in Westminster Abbey until 1649. The confession was completed in 1646 and presented to Parliament, which approved it after some revisions in June 1648. When the English monarchy was restored in 1660, the episcopal form of church government was reinstated, and the Presbyterian confession lost its official status in England. It was adopted by the Church of Scotland in 1647, by various American and English Presbyterian bodies (with some modifications), and by some Congregationalists and Baptists.

Patterned after the Irish Articles of Religion (1615), it also drew heavily upon the Reformed tradition of the European continent and the creedal heritage of the early Christian Church. In effect a theological consensus of international Calvinism in classic formulation, it consists of 33 chapters, closely reasoned and grave in style, and it provides some latitude among points of view recognized within the orthodoxy of the time. It states that the sole doctrinal authority is Scripture, and it agrees with and restates the doctrines of the Trinity and of Christ from the creeds of the early church. Reformed views of the sacraments, the ministry, and the two covenants of works and grace are given. According to the confession, the doctrine of the eternal decree (predestination) is that “some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death,” and yet “neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of creatures.”

And Got Questions says

The Westminster Confession of Faith, drawn up in the 1640s by an assembly of 151 theologians (mostly Presbyterians and Puritans) at Westminster Abbey, is the standard of doctrine for the Church of Scotland and many Presbyterian churches throughout the world. Several other denominations, including Baptists and Congregationalists, have used adaptations of the Westminster Confession of Faith as a basis for their own doctrinal statements. In each case, the Westminster Confession is considered subordinate to the Bible.

The Westminster Confession of Faith is a systematic exposition of Calvinism, written from a Puritan viewpoint. It was originally drafted to reform the Church of England and to unify the various Christian sects in England at that time. The document addresses doctrines such as the Trinity, the sacrificial death and resurrection of Jesus, sola scriptura, and sola fide. The full Westminster Confession of Faith can be found here.

From about 1537 Protestant Reformed groups in Europe had seen the need to draw up their own formal doctrinal confessions. This need arose in England after King Henry VIII broke with the Church of Rome in 1536 and the 1545 convening of the Council of Trent, which marked the beginning of today’s Roman Catholic Church. Under the rule of England’s Charles I, many Puritans in England dispersed, and civil war broke out in 1642. The Puritan parliament then called a church synod—the Westminster Assembly—to lay the foundation for a Reformed Church of England. The resulting document did not solve all the religious and political strife in England, but it did provide a brilliantly written and influential statement of biblical doctrine. The Westminster Confession of Faith is considered by many to be the best statement of systematic theology ever framed by the Christian church. As an attempt to “correctly handle the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15), the Westminster Confession of Faith has stood the test of time and remains a prime doctrinal standard for Protestants and evangelicals everywhere.

 

[Taken]

Here is a little commentary on Calvin and his beliefs.

Calvin: Predestination

Calvin on predestination: To his glory, God determined before all creation those who would obtain eternal life, and those who would receive eternal death.

www.theologian-theology.com

John Calvin on Predestination​

Calvin on Predestination​

John Calvin’s doctrine of predestination has often been rejected as unjust. In this series of two articles I will explain why, according to John Calvin, this charge is misplaced. In this article, I will summarize Calvin’s doctrine of predestination. My discussion of Calvin’s view will draw on excerpts from Book III, chapters 21-23, of his Institutes of the Christian Religion (1559) in Hans J. Hillerbrand’s collection The Protestant Reformation (ordinary page references are to this work), and sections 3.24.4 and 3.24.5 of Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion translated by Henry Beveridge (decimal references are to this work, pictured to the right).

Predestination According to Calvin​

According to John Calvin, predestination is God’s unchangeable decree from before the creation of the world that he would freely save some people (the elect), foreordaining them to eternal life, while the others (the reprobate) would be “barred from access to” salvation and sentenced to “eternal death (180, 184).” Calvin was careful to distinguish the predestination of individuals from the corporate election of nations such as Israel (185). He argued that an explanation of predestination is only complete when it includes the election of individuals (187).
Calvin described the basis of predestination in several ways. In general he affirmed that there is no basis for election outside of God. Referring to Eph. 1.9, Calvin noted that God purposed election “in Himself,” basing his decree of predestination on “nothing outside Himself (192).” Calvin attributed the salvation of the elect to God’s free decision to favor them (188). He variously described this as God’s “mere generosity (180, 187),” his “freely given mercy (189, 195, 211),” and the “good pleasure of His will (191; cf. Eph. 1.5).” Moreover, Calvin based the damnation of the reprobate solely in God’s decision (189, 200).
Since God’s reasons for predestination are wholly internal to his being (190), they are opaque to humanity. Ultimately, then, the basis of God’s predestination is mysterious and “utterly incomprehensible” to people (209). This mystery points to one of God’s purposes in predestination, to inspire wonder and reverence in believers (181). The things hidden in God are not to be understood by people, but rather revered in their “wonderful depth (179).” Indeed, for John Calvin the overarching purpose of predestination is for God to be glorified, both in the praise of the elect for his grace (192), and in the terrible yet glorious judgment of the reprobate (199).
Despite the mysterious basis of predestination, it is possible for the elect to be certain of their status as children of God (187). The first and seemingly most important indicator of election is what Calvin referred to as “the calling of God (3.24.4, 189).” His use of this term seems to refer to a subjective inward certainty that God has chosen a person for salvation. Elsewhere, Calvin suggested that having “knowledge of [God’s] name” and reflecting the process of sanctification are both indicators of election (189). Moreover, Calvin claimed that “communion with Christ” is sufficient proof of election (3.24.5): since we are elected in Jesus Christ (Eph. 1.4), we cannot seek the certainty of election “apart from the Son (3.24.5).” Calvin also seemed to obscurely suggest that the daily blessings received from the hand of God might rightly be perceived as an indication of election, “that secret adoption (3.24.4).” Together, these signs—the foremost being “the calling of God,”—yield certainty of salvation and tranquil peace with God (3.24.4).

John Calvin also defined his doctrine of predestination in opposition to differing views held by his contemporaries. First, Calvin took up the view that God predestines people according to his foreknowledge of their works. While Calvin affirmed the foreknowledge of God (184), he denied that God “adopts as sons those whom He foreknows will not be unworthy of His grace,” and damns those he knows will be inclined to “evil intention and ungodliness (190).” From Ephesians 1.4 he argued that one purpose of God’s election was to make his children holy. Since holiness is to be produced by election, it made no sense to Calvin to assert the reverse (191-2). Moreover, the whole point of teaching that election took place before creation (Eph. 1.4) is to demonstrate that election had nothing to do with meritorious works (191). Indeed, for Calvin another important purpose of predestination was to communicate that salvation is not based on individual merit but solely on God’s grace (191).
Second, Calvin took up the view that God elects some but condemns none (200). Calvin saw this view as “highly absurd” since it seemed to imply that the salvation received by the elect could also be attained by the non-elect as a result of “chance” or “their own effort (200).” Rejecting this inconsistent implication, Calvin asserted that the reprobate are those God intentionally neglects to choose (200). From Rom. 9.14ff, Calvin argued that the hardening of non-elect hearts is as much attributable to God as is mercy. Moreover, he noted that Paul did not shy away from this dreadful conclusion, but rather questioned the right of the clay to protest the Potter’s work (Rom. 9.20), and linked condemnation of the reprobate to God’s glory (Rom. 9.22-23). For John Calvin, election could not but stand “over against reprobation (200).”
In the next article in this series I will describe why and how Calvin chose to teach predestination, and I will articulate Calvin’s defense of predestination as just.

Also, Calvin also referred to himself as a prophet.

Thank you.

 

[Taken]

This is not an issue of semantics, Taken. Use whatever words you want to convey the concepts that you like. It's the concepts that are the problem, not the words used to convey them.

Let me illustrate what I mean by asking you a question.

Calvin believed that ALL the actions of ALL men (humans) were predestine by God. Not only that but Calvin taught that His predestination is not because of His foreknowledge but rather the other way around. (See the 8th quotation provided in my previous post.)

Do you believe that anyone has any ability to do otherwise?

If you answer, "no" then whether you want to use the term "forced" or not, is beside the point and doesn't change the meaning of Calvin's statement.

In short, Calvinism teaches that things happen, whether for good or bad, by God's own arbitrary decision and decree and for no other reason, and that whether a particular person is saved or condemned is an arbitrary decision made by God. And by "arbitrary" I mean that the decision was made for reasons completely detached from the person themselves or anything that anyone has or hasn't done. Changing a single word in one sentence isn't even going to mitigate that, never mind remedy or cure it.

Hi ~

I do believe ALL men have a PRE-determined
Destiny….
Men don’t know what they will choose to believe … until they make their choice sometime before they bodily die.
(Making NO choice, by default is being Against God…and thus NOT with God)

I suppose God could “wait and see” what men will choose….but then THAT ^ would undermine and make a lie that He is ALL Knowing…..and of course He would then have to establish a PLACE for those WITH Him and those AGAINST Him…..which as well is not the case.

By your few quotes, Calvin seemed to have a similar sense, but again I haven’t studied him, his works, or what people call Calvinism…nor am particularly interested in “name tags” that groups have established…
Ie Calvinism, Mormonism, Catholicism, Judaism, etc.

Christ Jesus made an offer to ALL men…of course the terms (Order and Way) is according to His Way….that each can choose or reject….God already knows the outcome of every mans choice and has already prepared a place for ALL men per their choice…and that shall be each man’s destiny., destination, and Pre-Known BY God.
IMO.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Phil .]

If you don't start making sense then I'll simply put you on ignore.

Romans 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.”

It’s only discordant beliefs that are triggered. They can be dispelled. You can be without them. If you have a question, feel free.

 

[Marymog]

Hi ~

I do believe ALL men have a PRE-determined
Destiny….
Men don’t know what they will choose to believe … until they make their choice sometime before they bodily die.
(Making NO choice, by default is being Against God…and thus NOT with God)



Glory to God,
Taken

Soooooo if I don't make a choice I am against God, but I on the other hand it's not up to me to make that choice because "ALL men have a PRE-determined Destiny…."? Huh....

Sooooo I have no choice to be against God....It is pre-determined?

 

[Taken]

Soooooo if I don't make a choice I am against God,

Correct.

but I on the other hand it's not up to me to make that choice

False.
It’s ONLY up to you TO CHOOSE the Lord God or TO NOT CHOOSE the Lord God.

because

”ALL men have a PRE-determined Destiny…."?

Yes.
BECAUSE…
God is all-knowing.
God knows Your choice BEFORE YOU Do.
God prepared your destiny Before you KNEW what you would choose and thus Obviously, your Destiny is Predetermined…
And Prepared For you.

Huh....

Sooooo I have no choice to be against God....

Ofcourse YOU have a Choice To Choose the Lord God or Not.

What does God KNOWING your choice Before you Make your choice have to do with you wondering IF you can make a choice?

is pre-determined?

Did your parents KNOW before YOU that YOU would be born?
Did you parents prepare A place For you for When you would be Born?

My My Did your parents pre-Determine your Destiny…
To live at their home?
To choose for you? Food, Clothes, Room, Bed?
To choose for you? Catholic Church?
To choose for you your education?

Did you grow, mature, make your own choice to leave your parents, home, food, clothes, room, bed?

Did you choose to keep the pre-determined Choice your parents Made “For you” or leave the Catholic Church?

You chose your parents pre-determined Catholic Church…Correct? Why?
Because you got a pretty new dress unlike you have ever had before and got to drink And eat in the sanctuary and you were on display for everyone in the sanctuary to see you in you new dress drinking and eating in the sanctuary…and received a gift ? A new Bible? A Rosary? Did YOU feel special?
If so Why?
How old were you when You chose to Choose what your parents predetermined what your destiny would be?

 

[Logikos]

Hi ~

I do believe ALL men have a PRE-determined
Destiny….

Not because of anything biblical, you don't.

Men don’t know what they will choose to believe … until they make their choice sometime before they bodily die.
(Making NO choice, by default is being Against God…and thus NOT with God)

I doubt you could establish this biblically either. Paul states explicitly that he was alive once and died when he sinned, not before. He also states in Romans that unbelievers "knew God" at one time but chose not to retain Him in their thoughts and so God turned them over to a debased mind and John the Baptist leapt in his mother's womb at the approach of Jesus Christ who was also still in the womb.

In short, it seems the default is not "being against God", as you put it
.

I suppose God could “wait and see” what men will choose….but then THAT ^ would undermine and make a lie that He is ALL Knowing…..and of course He would then have to establish a PLACE for those WITH Him and those AGAINST Him…..which as well is not the case.

God is NOT all knowing in the sense in which you mean it here! The bible doesn't teach that He knows every knowable thing but merely that He is able to know every knowable thing. Typical Christian doctrine goes well beyong even that God knows every knowable thing and states that there is nothing that God does not know. Most Christians believe that goes not only knows about every photon of light that leaves off the back side of Polaris (and every other star or source of light) but also that He is actively causing those photons to leave in the exact order and direction in which they leave. There is nothing biblical about this idea at all. It is predicated on Greek philosophical ideas that Augustine picked up from Aristotle and Plato.

Biblically, God can do anything doable that He wants to do and cannot be forced to do anything that He chooses not to do. Thus, God knows everything knowable that He wants to know.

By your few quotes, Calvin seemed to have a similar sense, but again I haven’t studied him, his works, or what people call Calvinism…nor am particularly interested in “name tags” that groups have established…

Most of Christianity is either Calvinist or Calvinistic. I personally consider Arminianism, the supposed opposite of Calvinism, to be too Calvinistic for my tastes! That's how pervasive it is! I say that about Arminianism, by the way, because they, like the Calvinists, believe that God exists outside of time and that the He has exhaustive foreknowledge and that He cannot change in anyway whatsoever. These things form the basis of what Calvinism is. The only reason they aren't Calvinists is because they are even less concerned about being rationally consistent than the Calvinists are and seem to simply cherry-pick which doctrines they are going to believe in smorgasbord style.

Ie Calvinism, Mormonism, Catholicism, Judaism, etc.

Rejecting labels is genuinely stupid, Taken. Whoever it was that sent you down that road has done you a very great disservice.

First of all, you can't do it. It is literally impossible to communicate effectively about complex issues without using labels. Labels are extremely useful things! Imagine a world in which you had no way of verbally distinguishing a Mormon from a Catholic without having to list their respective doctrines every time you mentioned one or the other?

Secondly, just because you accept a label as being generally descriptive of either yourself or others, doesn't mean that it has to be 100% totally accurate. Speaking in general terms is a perfectly legitimate way of communicating with people. Younger generations these days are almost frightened of speaking in generalities because of the insular lives they live within social media where every exception to any generality they happen to use is instantly pounced on and thrown in their face as "discriminatory" or "bigoted" or whatever.

Christ Jesus made an offer to ALL men…of course the terms (Order and Way) is according to His Way….that each can choose or reject….God already knows the outcome of every mans choice and has already prepared a place for ALL men per their choice…and that shall be each man’s destiny., destination, and Pre-Known BY God.
IMO.

Your opinion is unbiblical and logically impossible.

Let me ask you a question.

In God's dealings with mankind, His judgments regarding rewards and punishments, etc....

Is God just?


(This is NOT a trick question, I promise! It probably feels like it is because the answer feels like it should be so obvious as to preclude even asking the question, but I ask it anyway because, as some of the recent posts on this thread have shown, not everyone answers the question correctly!)

 

[Logikos]

You are right....

But it is surprising that Calvin is very present within the Westminster Confession of Faith.

From Britannica: Westminster Confession | Presbyterianism, Calvinism, Reformed Theology

Westminster Confession, confession of faith of English-speaking Presbyterians. It was produced by the Westminster Assembly, which was called together by the Long Parliament in 1643, during the English Civil War, and met regularly in Westminster Abbey until 1649. The confession was completed in 1646 and presented to Parliament, which approved it after some revisions in June 1648. When the English monarchy was restored in 1660, the episcopal form of church government was reinstated, and the Presbyterian confession lost its official status in England. It was adopted by the Church of Scotland in 1647, by various American and English Presbyterian bodies (with some modifications), and by some Congregationalists and Baptists.

Patterned after the Irish Articles of Religion (1615), it also drew heavily upon the Reformed tradition of the European continent and the creedal heritage of the early Christian Church. In effect a theological consensus of international Calvinism in classic formulation, it consists of 33 chapters, closely reasoned and grave in style, and it provides some latitude among points of view recognized within the orthodoxy of the time. It states that the sole doctrinal authority is Scripture, and it agrees with and restates the doctrines of the Trinity and of Christ from the creeds of the early church. Reformed views of the sacraments, the ministry, and the two covenants of works and grace are given. According to the confession, the doctrine of the eternal decree (predestination) is that “some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death,” and yet “neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of creatures.”

And Got Questions says

The Westminster Confession of Faith, drawn up in the 1640s by an assembly of 151 theologians (mostly Presbyterians and Puritans) at Westminster Abbey, is the standard of doctrine for the Church of Scotland and many Presbyterian churches throughout the world. Several other denominations, including Baptists and Congregationalists, have used adaptations of the Westminster Confession of Faith as a basis for their own doctrinal statements. In each case, the Westminster Confession is considered subordinate to the Bible.

The Westminster Confession of Faith is a systematic exposition of Calvinism, written from a Puritan viewpoint. It was originally drafted to reform the Church of England and to unify the various Christian sects in England at that time. The document addresses doctrines such as the Trinity, the sacrificial death and resurrection of Jesus, sola scriptura, and sola fide. The full Westminster Confession of Faith can be found here.

From about 1537 Protestant Reformed groups in Europe had seen the need to draw up their own formal doctrinal confessions. This need arose in England after King Henry VIII broke with the Church of Rome in 1536 and the 1545 convening of the Council of Trent, which marked the beginning of today’s Roman Catholic Church. Under the rule of England’s Charles I, many Puritans in England dispersed, and civil war broke out in 1642. The Puritan parliament then called a church synod—the Westminster Assembly—to lay the foundation for a Reformed Church of England. The resulting document did not solve all the religious and political strife in England, but it did provide a brilliantly written and influential statement of biblical doctrine. The Westminster Confession of Faith is considered by many to be the best statement of systematic theology ever framed by the Christian church. As an attempt to “correctly handle the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15), the Westminster Confession of Faith has stood the test of time and remains a prime doctrinal standard for Protestants and evangelicals everywhere.

I think that the Westminster Confession of Faith is one of the biggest mistakes that has ever happened in the history of Christianity! It is openly (i.e. knowingly and intentionally) irrational and, as such, is antithetical to the very concept of truth! Which is no surprise really. It was a natural result of the Reformation not going far enough in their efforts to rid the church of unbiblical doctrines. They did a great job of removing the influence of Rome from their doctrine but left the influence of pagan Greek philosophy fully intact, which was at least as bad as ideas such as purgatory and indulgences, et al.

 

[Logikos]

Soooooo if I don't make a choice I am against God, but I on the other hand it's not up to me to make that choice because "ALL men have a PRE-determined Destiny…."? Huh....

Sooooo I have no choice to be against God....It is pre-determined?

It sucks that I didn't think to say this!!!

 

[Logikos]

It’s only discordant beliefs that are triggered. They can be dispelled. You can be without them. If you have a question, feel free.

Okay, I warned you. That is the last cryptic waste of time post of yours that I will read.

Welcome to my ignore list.

 

[Phil .]

Okay, I warned you. That is the last cryptic waste of time post of yours that I will read.

Welcome to my ignore list.

Keep it simple… how’d that thought feel… great, or not great?

Using spirituality or religion as a means to ‘be right’ at the expense of suppressing emotions is referred to as spiritual bypassing, and is a refuting of the very message, the entire point.